Recent Posts

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
11
Klein's Vice President assumed that the company's records were accurate? WOW! Imagine that.



Mr. BELIN. Mr. Waldman, you have just put the microfilm which we call D-77 into your viewer which is marked a Microfilm Reader-Printer, and you have identified this as No. 270502, according to your records. Is this just a record number of yours on this particular shipment?
Mr. WALDMAN. That's a number which we assign for identification purposes.
Mr. BELIN. And on the microfilm record, would you please state who it shows this particular rifle was shipped
Mr. WALDMAN. Shipped to a Mr. A.--last name H-i-d-e-l-l, Post Office Box 2915, Dallas, Tex.
Mr. BELIN. And does it show arts' serial number or control number?
Mr. WALDMAN. It shows shipment of a rifle bearing our control number VC-836 and serial number C-2766.
Mr. BELIN. Is there a price shown for that?
Mr. WALDMAN. Price is $19.95, plus $1.50 postage and handling, or a total of $21.45.
Mr. BELIN. Now, I see another number off to the left. What is this number?
Mr. WALDMAN. The number that you referred to, C20-T750 is a catalog number.
Mr. BELIN. And after that, there appears some words of identification or description. Can you state what that is?
Mr. WALDMAN. The number designates an item which we sell, namely, an Italian carbine, 6.5 caliber rifle with the 4X scope.
Mr. BELIN. Is there a date of shipment which appears on this microfilm record?
Mr. WALDMAN. Yes; the date of shipment was March 20, 1963.
Mr. BELIN. Does it show by what means it was shipped?
Mr. WALDMAN. It was shipped by parcel post as indicated by this circle around the letters "PP."
Mr. BELIN. Does it show if any amount was enclosed with the order itself?
Mr. WALDMAN. Yes; the amount that was enclosed with the order was $21.45, as designated on the right-hand side of this order blank here.
Mr. BELIN. Opposite the words "total amount enclosed"?
Mr. WALDMAN. Yes.
Mr. BELIN. Is there anything which indicates in what form you received the money?
Mr. WALDMAN. Yes; below the amount is shown the letters "MO" designating money order.
Mr. BELIN. Now, I see the extreme top of this microfilm, the date, March 13, 1963; to what does that refer?
Mr. WALDMAN. This is an imprint made by our cash register indicating that the remittance received from the customer was passed through our register on that date.
Mr. BELIN. And to the right of that, I see $21.45. Is that correct?
Mr. WALDMAN. That's correct.


Waldman wasn't just saying that he assumed that the rifle was shipped to a Mr. A. Hidell, Post Office Box 2915, Dallas, Tex. He asserted positively that rifle was shipped to a Mr. A. Hidell, Post Office Box 2915, Dallas, Tex. He trusted what his own company's records were showing him.



Handwriting identification is consistently accepted as evidence in courts of law. The money order and CE 773 were examined by four or five experts in forensic document analysis. Maybe more.

Waldman wasn't just saying that he assumed that the rifle was shipped to a Mr. A. Hidell, Post Office Box 2915, Dallas, Tex. He asserted positively that rifle was shipped to a Mr. A. Hidell, Post Office Box 2915, Dallas, Tex. He trusted what his own company's records were showing him.

Thanks for showing the contradiction in your own argument.

If Waldman "trusted what his own company's records were showing him" he was in fact making an assumption. He may have confidently believed that the rifle was shipped to Hidell, but unless he actually shipped it himself, all he could do was assume that the rifle was actually send to the person mentioned on the form.

Handwriting identification is consistently accepted as evidence in courts of law. The money order and CE 773 were examined by four or five experts in forensic document analysis. Maybe more.

Appeal to a majority is a logical fallacy. The fact that more than one expert examined the photocopies and compared them to other writings claimed to be by Oswald's hand, do not make the conclusion true or correct. If you let several people do the exact same flawed test over and over again, you'll still end up with the same result every time.

Of course handwriting identification is accepted as evidence in the courts. I've been involved in several cases over the past 30 years where that was the case. It's not the findings of the expert that is the problem, it's the quality of the test. In this case, the experts had to work with photocopies of only a few handwritten words. They had no certified handwritings of Oswald to compare the documents with. All they had were some documents which they were told were written by Oswald. There was no authentication in the normal prescribed manner. And there was no way to examine the documents for the pressure applied to the paper by the pen and/or the flow of the pen over the paper during the writing. In other words, the procedure followed to make a determination was seriously flawed and probably wouldn't have held up in court. I have worked with handwriting experts enough to know that any "expert" that declares to 100% certainty that a text was writen by one particular person, to the exclusion of all others, should be instantly kicked out of the profession.

But after all this having been said, the bottom line is that the only thing that connects Hidell to the purchase of a rifle from Klein's are a few handwritten words on a order form and a money order, which some handwriting experts declared was Oswald's handwriting. That's it.... That's all there is.
12
Lone-gunman theorists have never been able to provide a plausible explanation for the wounding of James Tague. The Warren Commission tried to ignore Tague's wounding but were eventually forced to acknowledge it. For those who might be interested, I have posted a new article on the subject titled "The Wounding of James Tague Refutes the Lone-Gunman Theory of the JFK Assassination." Here is the URL:

https://miketgriffith.com/files/tague2.pdf

Quote
In addition, if the missile had been fired from the sixth-floor window, the bullet would have approached from the right rear and would have struck the head at a downward angle of around20 degrees. How would a fragment from such a bullet have traveled upward so as to clear both the roll bar and the windshield?

Bullets tend to take curved paths though ballistics gelatin. Deformed bullets even more so. The deformed ,and fragmenting, bullet curving significantly upward while passing through the head would not be an anomaly.
13
Lone-gunman theorists have never been able to provide a plausible explanation for the wounding of James Tague. The Warren Commission tried to ignore Tague's wounding but were eventually forced to acknowledge it. For those who might be interested, I have posted a new article on the subject titled "The Wounding of James Tague Refutes the Lone-Gunman Theory of the JFK Assassination." Here is the URL:

https://miketgriffith.com/files/tague2.pdf

Joe Elliot believes that what looks to be a lead smear on the curb was most likely from one of the lead weights used to balance tires. An automobile had, at some time, brushed a tire up against that curb. I'm leaning towards that theory myself.
14
Lone-gunman theorists have never been able to provide a plausible explanation for the wounding of James Tague. The Warren Commission tried to ignore Tague's wounding but were eventually forced to acknowledge it. For those who might be interested, I have posted a new article on the subject titled "The Wounding of James Tague Refutes the Lone-Gunman Theory of the JFK Assassination." Here is the URL:

https://miketgriffith.com/files/tague2.pdf

The concrete curb shows no sign of having been struck by an intact bullet.
15
Lone-gunman theorists have never been able to provide a plausible explanation for the wounding of James Tague. The Warren Commission tried to ignore Tague's wounding but were eventually forced to acknowledge it. For those who might be interested, I have posted a new article on the subject titled "The Wounding of James Tague Refutes the Lone-Gunman Theory of the JFK Assassination." Here is the URL:

https://miketgriffith.com/files/tague2.pdf

If Tague was hit at all, it was by a fragment from the head shot. One fragment struck the windshield. One struck the chrome piece above the windshield. Another exited the limo over the top of the windshield and went on to strike Tague.

16
Nope, sorry Tim but you are completely wrong.

The only documents possibly linked directly to Hidell are the microfilm fotocopies of the order form and the money order, with the actual connection only being established (for what that's worth) by handwriting analysis.

Waldman 7 is an internal document, perpared by Klein's staff based upon the incoming order form. It only proves that an order was processed and it has no direct relation to Hidell (or Oswald). Waldman's testimony merely confirms the internal procedure and provides no direct evidentary link to Hidell (or Oswald) either. Waldman may confirm as much as he wants that according to the documents a rifle was sent to a p.o. box in Dallas, but that's at best only an assumption on his part. He was not involved in shipping it, nor does he have any first hand knowledge about when and to whom the rifle was ever delivered.

This is exactly why the Waldman evidence is so extremely weak. It all comes back to a few handwritten words written on an order form and a money order for which not even originals are available for handwriting analysis.

Handwriting analysis isn't an exact science to begin with. Having worked with experts in the past, I can tell you there is not one expert in the world who can say with 100% certainty that a particular individual, to the exclusion of all others, wrote a particular text. Handwriting analysis is done by comparing known (and certified) samples of an individual to the text on a questioned document. In court cases, the individual has to provide at least 10 samples of his handwriting by writing them down in front of a notary public or a judge. In this case, with Oswald dead, this of course did not happen. The experts only relied on documents for comparison they were told had been written by Oswald. A second way to compare handwritting is to examine the pressure on the paper applied by the pen and the flow of the pen when a word is written. This kind of comparison can not be done on a photo copy!

But it gets worse. The order form and money order, by themselves, even if they were written by Oswald do not prove he actually bought a rifle for himself or ever received it. In theory (and you will probably dismiss this out of hand for no good reason), a guy named or using the name Hidell could have asked Oswald to fill in the form and the money order for him citing for instance that he himself couldn't write. In my company I frequently fill in documents for people who have difficulties doing that themselves. To be clear, I'm not saying this actually happened, but it needs to be ruled out as a possibility before anyone can say with any kind of certainty that Oswald ordered the rifle for himself.

Klein's Vice President assumed that the company's records were accurate? WOW! Imagine that.



Mr. BELIN. Mr. Waldman, you have just put the microfilm which we call D-77 into your viewer which is marked a Microfilm Reader-Printer, and you have identified this as No. 270502, according to your records. Is this just a record number of yours on this particular shipment?
Mr. WALDMAN. That's a number which we assign for identification purposes.
Mr. BELIN. And on the microfilm record, would you please state who it shows this particular rifle was shipped
Mr. WALDMAN. Shipped to a Mr. A.--last name H-i-d-e-l-l, Post Office Box 2915, Dallas, Tex.
Mr. BELIN. And does it show arts' serial number or control number?
Mr. WALDMAN. It shows shipment of a rifle bearing our control number VC-836 and serial number C-2766.
Mr. BELIN. Is there a price shown for that?
Mr. WALDMAN. Price is $19.95, plus $1.50 postage and handling, or a total of $21.45.
Mr. BELIN. Now, I see another number off to the left. What is this number?
Mr. WALDMAN. The number that you referred to, C20-T750 is a catalog number.
Mr. BELIN. And after that, there appears some words of identification or description. Can you state what that is?
Mr. WALDMAN. The number designates an item which we sell, namely, an Italian carbine, 6.5 caliber rifle with the 4X scope.
Mr. BELIN. Is there a date of shipment which appears on this microfilm record?
Mr. WALDMAN. Yes; the date of shipment was March 20, 1963.
Mr. BELIN. Does it show by what means it was shipped?
Mr. WALDMAN. It was shipped by parcel post as indicated by this circle around the letters "PP."
Mr. BELIN. Does it show if any amount was enclosed with the order itself?
Mr. WALDMAN. Yes; the amount that was enclosed with the order was $21.45, as designated on the right-hand side of this order blank here.
Mr. BELIN. Opposite the words "total amount enclosed"?
Mr. WALDMAN. Yes.
Mr. BELIN. Is there anything which indicates in what form you received the money?
Mr. WALDMAN. Yes; below the amount is shown the letters "MO" designating money order.
Mr. BELIN. Now, I see the extreme top of this microfilm, the date, March 13, 1963; to what does that refer?
Mr. WALDMAN. This is an imprint made by our cash register indicating that the remittance received from the customer was passed through our register on that date.
Mr. BELIN. And to the right of that, I see $21.45. Is that correct?
Mr. WALDMAN. That's correct.


Waldman wasn't just saying that he assumed that the rifle was shipped to a Mr. A. Hidell, Post Office Box 2915, Dallas, Tex. He asserted positively that rifle was shipped to a Mr. A. Hidell, Post Office Box 2915, Dallas, Tex. He trusted what his own company's records were showing him.



Handwriting identification is consistently accepted as evidence in courts of law. The money order and CE 773 were examined by four or five experts in forensic document analysis. Maybe more.
17
I don't take Bugliosi bait. There is ZERO evidence of C 2766 ever being in the bag, read the FBI reports.

I've read the FBI reports. The matched fibers do not equate with zero evidence. Also, just the fact that it was found in the sniper's nest that C2766 was used from strongly suggests that C2766 had been in that bag.

Quote
Except when he was wrong. His account vs. Latona's observations make no sense.

His being wrong about minor details about the rifle has no impact on his full accounting for the existence of the print lift itself.

Quote
I've seen the alleged evidence. I don't care about the money order, show that Klein's stocked C 2766 when they claim to have shipped it.



Quote
Who do you think you're fooling? Not submitted means not accounted for.

Not submitted just means that it was not submitted to the Crime Lab. Submitting an item to the Crime Lab was not an absolute requirement. Lots of items were never submitted. The shell was accounted for.


18
Lone-gunman theorists have never been able to provide a plausible explanation for the wounding of James Tague. The Warren Commission tried to ignore Tague's wounding but were eventually forced to acknowledge it. For those who might be interested, I have posted a new article on the subject titled "The Wounding of James Tague Refutes the Lone-Gunman Theory of the JFK Assassination." Here is the URL:

https://miketgriffith.com/files/tague2.pdf



19

Question:

If you want an opinion from a neuroscientist on whether JFK’s backward movement is caused by a neuromuscular spasm, why not go ask a real neuroscientist?

Why ask a Psychology professor, who has been described as a Professor of Psychology, working with the Department of Psychology, as described below;

https://books.google.com/books?id=WBzaBwAAQBAJ&pg=PA1&lpg=PA1&dq=%22robert+m+zacharko%22+%22professor+of+psychology%22+%22department+of+psychology%22&source=bl&ots=mH3XW37yd5&sig=ACfU3U2lwRX7sX8akU0brivswXb7UUhPXQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj5wu3GpbDqAhUtKDQIHSIEAO8Q6AEwAHoECAIQAQ#v=onepage&q=%22robert%20m%20zacharko%22%20%22professor%20of%20psychology%22%20%22department%20of%20psychology%22&f=false



And in his obituary:

Quote
He finished his career as a Professor in the Department of Psychology at Carleton University.

https://heritagefh.ca/tribute/details/338/Robert-Zacharko/obituary.html

Yes, the obituary also says:

Quote
Post-graduate studies followed at University of Saskatoon where he received his doctorate specializing in the study of neuroscience.



But as the website a Carleton makes clear:

Quote
Neuroscience is an emerging academic discipline that includes physiological, anatomical, biochemical, and behavioural studies of the nervous system.

http://www3.carleton.ca/calendars/archives/grad/9798/SCIENCE/Institute_of_Neuroscience.htm

A “Neuroscientist” can be an expert in either physiological, anatomical, biochemical studies, fields of use in evaluating the neuromuscular spasm hypothesis. but also includes behavioral studies, i.e.: Psychology, a field of study that is not so pertinent.



Question:

Why not use a “Neuroscientist” who really has some expertise in either physiological, anatomical or biochemical studies to decide on this question?

Answer:

Because Mr. Griffith could find none. But he could find a Psychology professor who would give a favorable opinion.

20
Donald Trump is in steep cognitive decline as he slurs his words when he's speaking.  "Accomplimenshayz", "Tolereiyted", "Asbadazizziz", "Duruuur" is complete gibberish. The leader of the free world can't even speak...not good. We deserve better.


   
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
Mobile View