Recent Posts
11
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: Oleg Nechiporenko and the 2025 Russian files
« Last post by Tommy Shanks on Today at 04:15:53 PM »Pretty sure this is just a simple mistake, like nearly every anomaly that conspiracy theorists like to twist into something larger.
12
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: The Forgotten Rifle Test: The HSCA's Rifle Test
« Last post by Michael T. Griffith on Today at 03:54:30 PM »More BLAH, BLAH, BLAH from MTG. He ignores some very simple truths.
Both the fragments bullet found in the limo and CE399 were positively matched to Oswald's rifle to the exclusion of all other weapons through well established and accept means that have been accepted as valid evidence by our courts since 1879.
The fragments were found in the same limo that both shooting victims were riding in.
CE399 was found on the stretcher that one of the victims was transported on at Parkland.
NAA testing showed that the lead fragments recovered from the limo matched the metallurgical contend of the lead fragments recovered from JFK's head.
NAA testing showed the fragments from JBC's wrist matched the lead in CE399.
While it has been determined that NAA testing is not 100% conclusive that two fragments came from the same bullet, it is still probative. It would be a remarkable coincidence if just one of these tests produced a false positive. MTG wants us to believe that two remarkable coincidences occurred. It would be highly significant if they did not match. In that circumstance we could conclude that the fragments did not come from the same bullet.
Likewise, it would be remarkable if the striations on the two large copper fragments just coincidentally matched test bullets from Oswald's rifle.
In short, the forensic evidence is exactly what we would expect it to be if the fragmented bullet in the limo, the recovered lead fragments, and CE399 had all come through the barrel of Oswald's rifle. MTG will continue to ignore this and create excuses for not believing that is what happened. MTG would have us believe that the fragments from JBC's wrist and the lead from CE399 just coincidentally had the same make up. MTG would have us believe that the lead fragment from recovered from the limo and the fragments removed from JFK's head just coincidentally had the same make up.
MTG is an airhead. That has been proven conclusively.
LOL! Are you serious? You're still repeating Guinn's refuted NAA claims, even after being presented with two scientific studies done by seven scientists that destroyed those claims?
And you're still citing ballistic matching as concrete evidence that CE 399 and the bullet fragments came from the alleged murder weapon, even after being made aware that numerous scientists have found serious problems with the entire field of ballistic matching?
I should point out for any newcomers that your reference to "well established and accepted means that have been accepted as valid evidence by our courts since 1879" is referring to ballistic matching, also known as forensic firearms analysis.
As I've said before, even when people present you with hard scientific evidence, you will reject it for no valid reason simply because it refutes what you want to believe.
Obviously, until I brought them to your attention, you were blissfully unaware of the scientific objections to ballistic matching. You have clearly been caught off guard by this information, yet you refuse to acknowledge it and just blindly continue to cite ballistic matching because it is the one and only way you can link the bullet and fragment evidence in the JFK case with "Oswald's rifle."
Here are more articles on the scientific community's objections to ballistic matching:
The Myth of the Match: Pattern Matching in Cases Involving Firearms Evidence
https://www.wisbar.org/NewsPublications/WisconsinLawyer/Pages/Article.aspx?Volume=98&Issue=2&ArticleID=30850
That “Ballistics Match” on TV Isn’t as Certain as You Think (written by a former prosecutor and an ACS-CHAL forensic lawyer-scientist)
https://www.texasdwisite.com/forensic-science/ballistics-matching/
REPORT TO THE PRESIDENT: Forensic Science in Criminal Courts: Ensuring Scientific Validity of Feature-Comparison Methods
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/PCAST/pcast_forensic_science_report_final.pdf
Maryland Supreme Court Limits Testimony on Bullet-Matching Evidence
https://reason.com/2023/06/22/maryland-supreme-court-limits-testimony-on-bullet-matching-evidence/
Takeaways From a Refreshing Rejection of Junk Science
https://kaiserlaw.com/takeaways-from-a-refreshing-rejection-of-junk-science/
Motion to Exclude Ballistics Expert Evidence
https://datafordefenders.org/document/motion-to-exclude-ballistics-expert-evidence/
Amicus Brief in Support of Excluding Firearm and Toolmark (FA/TM) Identification Evidence
https://datafordefenders.org/document/amicus-brief-in-support-of-excluding-firearm-and-toolmark-fa-tm-identification-evidence/
Here is an excerpt from another recent article on the scientific objections to ballistic matching, titled "Devil in the Grooves: The Case Against Forensic Firearms Analysis," authored by investigative journalist Radley Balko:
For more than a century, forensic firearms analysts have been telling juries that they can match a specific bullet to a specific gun, to the exclusion of all other guns. This claimed ability has helped to put tens of thousands of people in prison, and in a nontrivial percentage of those cases, it’s safe to say that ballistics matching was the only evidence linking the accused to the crime.
But as with other forensic specialties collectively known as pattern matching fields, the claim is facing growing scrutiny. Scientists from outside of forensics point out that there’s no scientific basis for much of what firearms analysts say in court. These critics, backed by a growing body of research, make a pretty startling claim — one that could have profound effects on the criminal justice system: We don't actually know if it's possible to match a specific bullet to a specific gun. And even if it is, we don't know if forensic firearms analysts are any good at it.
The problem with pattern matching
To understand why Hooks’s ruling is so important, we need to delve into some background.
Forensic firearms analysis, or ballistic matching, falls under a category of forensics called toolmark identification, which itself falls under a broader category called pattern matching.
In pattern matching specialties, analysts typically look at a piece of forensic evidence taken from a crime scene and compare it to another piece of evidence linked to a suspect. So they might compare a hair from a suspect’s head to a hair found at the crime scene; a bite mark found on the victim’s body to a suspect’s teeth; or shoe prints to a suspect’s loafers.
Pattern matching analysts then typically make one of three determinations: the two items are a match, the evidence from the accused can be excluded as the source of the evidence found at the crime scene (not a match), or there isn’t sufficient data to make a determination (inconclusive).
In the subfield of toolmark identification, analysts attempt to determine if a mark linked to the crime scene was created by a piece of evidence linked to a suspect. Technically, bitemark analysis is a form of toolmark analysis (the teeth are the “tool”). Toolmark analysts might also try to match knife wounds to a specific knife, the marks on a door or door frame to a specific pry bar or screwdriver, or the marks on a bullet or shell casing to a specific gun.
Pattern matching forensics has a dubious history. Perhaps the most notorious example is the Mississippi dentist Michael West, who in the 1990s and 2000s claimed he could use a fluorescent light to find marks on skin that no one else could see. West claimed to have found otherwise invisible bite marks on victims' bodies, or marks on suspects’ hands that could only have come from gripping a specific knife, or from grasping a victim’s specific purse strap. He sometimes claimed to have found these marks weeks after the incident that allegedly created them. West even once claimed he could match the fingernail marks on a suspect’s back to the fingernails of the victim. He “tested” his theory by prying the fingernails off the dead victim, putting them on sticks, using the sticks to scratch fresh skin, and then “matching” the two sets of fingernail scrapes.
Defenders of these fields argue that analysts like West are aberrant rogues, and not representative of analysts today. But West was considered a pioneer in his day, and the fact that courts continued to certify charlatans like him as expert witnesses ought to tell us something about their ability to distinguish credible expertise from quackery.
Some of the problems in pattern matching are specific to particular fields, but two core criticisms apply across the board. The first is that these fields are entirely subjective. Pattern matching largely boils down to an analyst “eyeballing” two pieces of evidence, then deciding if they're a match. Unlike, say, identifying a blood type or matching a car to registration records, there are no objective criteria in pattern matching. There are no ground truths to find. There are no numbers to crunch.
The second overarching problem is that in most of these areas of analysis, we don’t know how often the distinguishing characteristics used to determine a “match” occur across the broader population of the thing being examined. For example, we don’t know what percentage of the human population’s teeth are capable of leaving a certain pattern of marks on human skin. We don’t even know if such a calculation is even possible. And if it were possible, we don’t know that human skin is capable of recording and preserving bite marks in a way that’s useful (the studies that have examined this suggest it isn't). The characteristics of a bite mark could be affected by the angle of the biter’s teeth, whether the victim was pulling away at the time of the bite, the elasticity of the victim’s skin, the rate at which the victim’s body heals, and countless other factors.
Similarly, we can’t say what percentage of pry bars are capable of leaving a series of scratches on a door. In many cases, both the tool and the substance on which it recorded marks could be affected by an almost endless number of variables. The marks on a door frame might have been created by the screwdriver or pry bar found in the suspect’s home, but there’s no scientific basis to claim the perpetrator couldn’t have used a different screwdriver, pry bar, or a boundless list of other items.
To get a feel for the subjectivity of these fields, we can contrast them with DNA. A typical DNA test looks at a number of markers — typically 16 to 20 — and the sequence of genes present at those markers. Because we know how often a particular sequence occurs at each marker across the human population, we can calculate the odds of anyone other than the suspect having the same DNA sequence found at those markers. If a DNA sample has degraded to the point where analysts can’t use all 20 markers, they can adjust the percentages accordingly. We can calculate a specific margin for error — the odds that a particular hair, skin cell, or sperm cell belongs to anyone other than the defendant, and then relay that information to the jury to inform their deliberations.
We can’t generate a margin for error in the pattern matching fields because we don’t know the frequency with which any of these allegedly distinguishing characteristics occur. Therefore, we can’t estimate the odds that anyone other than the suspect may have left that evidence. We can only rely on the opinions of expert witnesses and their ability to eyeball it. (https://radleybalko.substack.com/p/devil-in-the-grooves-the-case-against)
Speaking of ignoring "very simple truths," why do you keep ignoring and denying the fact that no "Oswald" rifle test has ever duplicated Oswald's alleged shooting performance, even though the tests did not require the expert riflemen to fire under all the same conditions that Oswald would have faced?
13
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: Oleg Nechiporenko and the 2025 Russian files
« Last post by Charles Heron on Today at 03:43:18 PM »No, I assume the date on the residence permit is a mistake, although I'm not an expert on the assassination.
I mentioned it because I couldn't find anyone else here who had, and also because of the fact that, in the 2008 Russian version of his book, Nechiporenko writes that that residence permit was one of 11 documents "concerning Oswald's residence and employment" which were due to be handed over to the Americans in 1964, but in the 1993 English version, he only lists nine of those documents, minus the two residence permits, one of which contains the 1960 marriage date.
I mentioned it because I couldn't find anyone else here who had, and also because of the fact that, in the 2008 Russian version of his book, Nechiporenko writes that that residence permit was one of 11 documents "concerning Oswald's residence and employment" which were due to be handed over to the Americans in 1964, but in the 1993 English version, he only lists nine of those documents, minus the two residence permits, one of which contains the 1960 marriage date.
14
General Discussion And Debate (Any Topic) / Re: I have to make sure I have popcorn and beer on hand for this one
« Last post by Richard Smith on Today at 03:38:36 PM »I'm all for his execution but making it public garners sympathy for the guy among some types. It also offers him a platform to make him a martyr. Better to do it in private like they did with the Nazis at Nuremberg. Erase this scum from the Earth as though he never existed rather than amplify his cause. They are never going to live stream it.
15
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: Brian Doyle: Audio Interview With Witness Sarah Stanton's Granddaughter
« Last post by Tommy Shanks on Today at 03:38:29 PM »Brian Doyle is absolutely hopeless. He actually believes there was a doppelganger named "Harvey" Oswald? I'd be laughing aloud if it weren't so sad.
16
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: On the Trail of Delusion, Episode 50, with Rob Clark
« Last post by Tommy Shanks on Today at 03:36:54 PM »
Manchester witnessed Shaw in Clinton, Louisiana...Manchester had witnessed something so dangerous that he was bribed with a promotion in order to keep quiet...Manchester replied that he would rip the offerer of that bribe a new one...
And your proof of this is..... ?
17
General Discussion And Debate (Any Topic) / Re: Am I the only one...
« Last post by Richard Smith on Today at 03:35:11 PM »During past ten years, only 14 states and '45 Trump have performed executions. Five of those states are
former confederate states. States performing executions, except Utah, dominated by a cult, are least safe
most violent, "enjoy" lowest average education level and highest incarceration rates per capita.
So, why do it? Executioners end up with PTSD, and execution process costs much more than life sentences.
Some states award money to wrongfully convicted. Why not abolish and fund scholarships for criminal justice
education in the names of murder victims, with part of taxpayer funds saved from abolishing executions?
After a grisly triple murder, the state of Connecticut abolished the death penalty, anyway.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Connecticut
"Cheshire murder case
One notable capital case in Connecticut was the Cheshire home invasion murders. The two murderers, Steven Hayes and Joshua Komisarjevsky, were both sentenced to death for the crime, and were among the inmates who had their sentences reduced as result of the state supreme court ruling. Survivor Dr. Petit condemned the state's decision to abolish capital punishment and spare the two criminals.[13]"
If you enjoy residing in a shithole state, cling to reactionary right wing mindset and dismiss scientific consensus.
Massachusetts is ranked 2nd safest state, no executions, lowesr per capita incarcerated, 241 per 100,000
twice % earned Bachelor's degrees as least educated state West Virginia, the state with least foreign born %
and highest % white native born. Massachusetts has closed prisons due to lack of inmates. Alabama building
new prisons at construction cost of $300,000 per bed !
https://wallethub.com/edu/safest-states-to-live-in/4566
At least you didn't blame Russia or Putin for once. These "confederate states" that you reference are the same ones that people from NY and California are moving to in droves? Do people move their families to other states in the belief that these states are worse than the ones they are fleeing? LOL. What a TDS fantasy world you are living it. People are literally voting with their feet (to give you a thrill by paraphrasing Lenin). They are fleeing the disasters created by decades long liberal rule in places like California and NY. Crime, taxes, illegal aliens, homeless encampments. An intentional catastrophe to make as many people downtrodden and reliant on the government for handouts as possible
18
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: The Miracle On Elm Street
« Last post by Jack Nessan on Today at 03:31:46 PM »"The First Shot" thread.
Reply #2017 (with follow up posts - Reply #2021, #2025)
Is that precise enough for you?
Now, FOR THE FIFTH TIME - do you believe Rowland invented seeing the man on the 6th floor? Yes or No.
Are you now ready for a debate?
What part of this issue would you like to kick off with?
Stop wasting time and let's go!
What part of this issue would you like to kick off with?
Go---Start Debating, use reply 2025 to start.
Good summary by Zeon.
Zeon Mason:
Reply 2025
Ok, thanks for posting that WC testimony of Rowland wife. It’s only the part of him telling her about sighting a man with gun at the SE window that she confirms. The black elderly male in the SW window is an after the fact detail which maybe an “embellishment”.
Therefore there’s more wiggle room here that BRW was never in the SN but that he was where he said he was siting on the cart a couple windows down from the box wall. Why chicken bones were found on top the boxes IDK but it’s not that relevant anymore as now there is time from 11:45 till 11:49 that the TSBD shooter had time to stack boxes and adjust the window.
Can we reasonably also discard Rowlands sighting of a man with rifle in hand at the SW window before the fact? If so then there is no problem with Oswald being sighted at by Carolyn Arnold from 12:15-12:17 as he had already prepared the SN from 11:45 till about 12:00 when he went down to the 1st floor and seen by Eddie Piper then.
19
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: Brian Doyle: Audio Interview With Witness Sarah Stanton's Granddaughter
« Last post by John Corbett on Today at 03:20:30 PM »If you have any investigation/detective skills what so ever you'll understand that Sarah Stanton accidentally caught Harvey hiding on the 2nd Floor staircase landing waiting for Mrs Reid to excite the ladies in the 2nd Floor Lunch Room with reports of the limousine's progress as related to her by her husband over the telephone...This ruse was designed to impart on supervisor Reid the power to organize the lady employees as a group to go down to the street/front steps to watch the motorcade - therefore leaving a safe window-less room empty in the back of the building where the patsy would not be seen...Stanton was probably one of the ladies Mrs Reid cleared out and her unexpected encounter with Harvey on the staircase landing was an unplanned mistake that exposed the whole plan to a witness...It is possible that Harvey's encounter with Stanton drove him temporarily down to the 1st Floor where he saw Jarman and Norman enter...But Harvey came back up to the 2nd Floor Lunch Room where he was seen by Carolyn Arnold carrying out his intention of going back in to the Break Room to eat his lunch...Later the 2nd Floor staircase landing would once again prove detrimental to the conspiracy when Officer Baker saw Harvey standing looking out the Lunch Room Vestibule window...
It is all pretty wrapped up now Corbett...Don't bother with shallow denials...
The Education Forum prefers not to solve the case and works against this final solution...It does so so it can keep its favorite researcher Bart Kamp from being embarrassingly refuted...
The Education Forum enforces Gordon's wrongful banning of myself with total censorship...It does that because otherwise they would have to admit their site was run by a fool who banned the guy who cracked the case...
Why are you bothering to post here or the Ed Forum? Why aren't you taking your "ground shaking" discoveries, to CBS, NBC, ABC, Fox, CNN, MSNOW or any of the other cable news outlets? How about the NY Times, WaPo, or the LA Times? Fame and fortune await you if you would just get off your keester and show some initiative. Why aren't you sharing this with the rest of the world?
20
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / On the Trail of Delusion, Episode 50, with Rob Clark
« Last post by Brian Doyle on Today at 02:58:38 PM »Manchester witnessed Shaw in Clinton, Louisiana...Manchester had witnessed something so dangerous that he was bribed with a promotion in order to keep quiet...Manchester replied that he would rip the offerer of that bribe a new one...