JFK Assassination Forum

Cortlandt Cunningham, from the FBI laboratory in the Firearms Identification Unit determined that one of the revolver shells that Oswald discarded at the Tippit crime scene came from Oswald's revolver.

Mr. EISENBERG. Is that all the photographs?
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. No, there is one more.
This photograph is a photograph of the firing-pin impression of the C-49 cartridge case, and the firing-pin impression on the test from Oswald's revolver, and this is Commission document 600.
Mr. EISENBERG. And the magnification?
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. 120 times, approximately.
Now, here you have very distinctive marks, but it is much more difficult for a layman to pick them out. That is the reason I have circled these marks and numbered them, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, on each side of the hairline. On the left is C-49, and on the right is the cartridge case obtained from C-143.
You have this very large, very distinctive imperfection.
Mr. EISENBERG. You are pointing to circle number 1?
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. In number 1. Also, in number 2, it looks like a little set of railroad tracks, and this one with the same shape coming down through. You can see this little piece and this little piece. Over here you have a real small "railroad track."
Mr. EISENBERG. That is number 3?
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. That is number 3. And it looks like a little hump or bump, and that is very distinctive.
There is a slight overlapping here, but you can see it is sort of a V shape--in number 4, very distinctive. Down here you have a Z line with a line through it, number 6. I only brought those out to show six of the similarities. If you go through you can pick out places in the firing-pin impressions, that are similar, by yourself.
Mr. EISENBERG. On the top of each of these photos, C-49 and C--15, there is a large comma- shaped indentation, or comma-shaped mark. What is that caused by, Mr. Cunningham?
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. That is caused by a very large imperfection--a very distinctive imperfection in the firing pin itself. And here it is.
Here I am looking at Commission document 601, the breech face and firing pin. If you will look at the firing pin in this photograph, you will see over on this side, this very large imperfection. It is like a facet--it is a flattened side. It shows up in the photograph of the firing pin.
It is indented--since it is missing from the firing pin, it will show as a flattened area in the firing-pin impression. In other words, what is concave on the firing pin itself, will be convex in the firing-pin impression.
Mr. EISENBERG. If there are no further questions on the cartridge cases, I will move on to the bullets.
Representative FORD. Mr. Boggs?
Representative BOGGS. Just one question. What you are saying is that there is no doubt about the fact that the cartridges that you examined came from this revolver?
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. That is correct.

  If You really believe the POTUS was under fire for a continuous 9 - 10+ Seconds, and Not a single member of the SS returned fire or so much as even left their car to try and locate/liquidate the shooter(s), then you are Indicting the SS. This 9 - 10+ seconds of active fire with Zero Proactive Response means the SS was either Totally Incompetent or Complicit. There's no 2 ways about it. Being under fire for a continuous 9 - 10+ seconds is an extremely Long Time. And then everybody just drives off? If you saw this in a B Movie you would say, "Never gonna happen".

At last, I've cracked the code! I understand the attraction of the JFKA, at least for me and probably for you! It's all so completely nutty that it's an antidote to the increasingly grim and depressing world in which we live. There is absolutely no reality to it! It's a welcome escape, like a perpetual Star Trek convention (in fact, eerily similar to a perpetual Star Trek convention). I thus no longer have any qualms or apologies, to myself or anyone else. Yes, I am escaping from reality! I'm donning my Klingon regalia, figuratively speaking, and hiding out in the alternate universe of the JFKA!

I had this epiphany while scrolling through threads at the Ed Forum. The most active include (1) Greg Doudna, who is sort of a scholarly Royell Storing and who, like Royell, is almost pathetically desperate to be taken seriously. He has at two long threads to the effect that Larry Crafard killed Tippit - and someone like Tom Gram, whom I had previously thought was fairly sane, agrees with him! (2) Someone named Anthony Venturella, who has the most hugely complex Lifton, Horne, et al. theory about two morgues and body alteration and whatnot and whose work is being hailed as the biggest advance in JFKA conspiracy theorizing since 1945. (3) The ultimate hoot, J. Keven Hofeling, Esq., a smalltime retired Utah attorney who ostensibly retired to "transition" to "IT, Cybersecurity, and AI consulting," who cannot say anything in less than 10,000 words with 14 charts and graphs, and who is on an absolute crusade to demonstrate the Z film was altered.

Fantasy Land, I tell ya! The problem with the Ed Forum is that the other 15 most active threads are all Trump-oriented, and I for one refuse to be sucked back into reality.

I do like Keven's self-important disclaimer at the end of every post, which would have had me laughing out loud even when I was a lawyer. The following language shall henceforth be implied in each of my posts. You must, of course, mentally substitute for the phrase "Law Offices of J. Keven Hofeliing, LLC" the phrase "Law Offices of Lance Payette, if said law offices in fact exist." (According to the Utah State Bar, Brother Hofeling has, like moi, resigned from the bar. Someone - me? - should perhaps inform Brother Hofeling that a "resigned" attorney - unlike a "retired" attorney - is "not an attorney" and that holding yourself out as such can get you into trouble with the Bar.)

Joseph D. Nicol, Superintendent of the Bureau of Criminal Identification and Investigation for the State of Illinois, determined that one of the bullets found in Tippit came from Oswald's revolver.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have this admitted? That would be 625.
(The item described was marked Commission Exhibit No. 625 and received in evidence.)
Mr. EISENBERG. These arrows, Mr. Nicol, can you explain why they are different?
Mr. NICOL. This was one I made up originally and then decided that the illustration would be ample with one arrow in that one position.
Mr. DULLES. The one that is being admitted is the one-arrow photograph.
Mr. EISENBERG. The arrows are placed on mechanically after the photograph is developed?
Mr. NICOL. That is correct.
Mr. EISENBERG. And therefore it can vary?
Mr. NICOL. Yes. This is not a part of the photographic process.
Mr. EISENBERG. What is the magnification here, Mr. Nicol?
Mr. NICOL. It would be pretty close to 25 to 30 diameters. I cannot measure exactly the magnification.
Mr. NICOL. This illustrates some of the lines, not all of them, that I saw on a comparison of 502 and K-3. At the position of the arrow, you are looking at the top of the groove; adjacent to it in the lower portion is a land impression. And on that shoulder there are approximately five or six matching lines. They are very fine striations. These would be indicative of the fact that the same portion of the barrel had ridden on both projectiles.
Mr. EISENBERG. Well, now, there seems to be significantly less markings here than on the bullets which were seen earlier, which had come from the rifle. Does that same condition pertain when the bullet is viewed under the microscope?
Mr. NICOL. Yes. Of course, we are dealing with two different types of ammunition. One is a lead projectile, and the other is a metal-case projectile. And the ability of the metal-case projectile to pick up and retain fine striations, even in spite of distortion and mutilation, far exceeds what the lead projectile will do. Furthermore, the lead being a soft and low-melting-point material is more subject to erosion of hot gases. So that there are many more variables in the reproduction in terms of a lead projectile as over against a metal-case projectile.
Mr. EISENBERG. You found enough similarities to satisfy yourself that there is an identification here?
Mr. NICOL. I am satisfied that the two projectiles came from the same weapon.

But, of course! We know the "steer clear of the Russians" angle from many sources. The "steer clear of LBJ" angle is obvious because ... yes, wait for it ... Cui bono? practically screams LBJ was involved. Oddly, despite the "great pressure" the WR doesn't deal with the LBJ elephant in the room at all.

Cray was no lightweight by any means: https://obituaries.paloaltoonline.com/obituaries/print/ed-cray?o=6011.

His biography of Warren, which I admittedly haven't read, won the American Bar Association's Silver Gavel Award as the best law-related book of the year.