Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: BWF and LMR may not have been the only ones who saw LHO with a bag on 11/22/1963  (Read 95450 times)

Offline Alan Ford

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4820
Advertisement
An important double question from the pertinent article on the McAdams site:

"If the bag [which Oswald carried to work that morning] really contained curtain rods, where did the curtain rods come from and where did they go?"

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/bag.htm

The writer of the article will be mightily relieved to know that we now have the answer to both questions:

------------The 2 curtain rods came from the Paine garage

------------They ended up in the DPD Crime Scene Search Section being tested for Mr Oswald's fingerprints after being found in the Depository building.

We look forward to seeing the article updated in line with Prof. McAdams' stated mission of "debunking the mass of misinformation and disinformation surrounding the murder of JFK"!

 Thumb1:
« Last Edit: April 18, 2019, 07:46:08 PM by Alan Ford »

JFK Assassination Forum


Offline Alan Ford

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4820
Don?t we? What do you conclude from CE1952?


It must break Mr Nickerson's heart that the submission date on this version is "3-15-64" too...   :'(

Now!

The two things to note about this second version of the Crime Scene Search Section form:

-------------------we are seeing only a black-and-white copy, whereas we have the first version in glorious technicolor

-------------------this second version is identical in content to the first version except for the parts boxed in red here:



 Thumb1:
« Last Edit: April 18, 2019, 08:11:14 PM by Alan Ford »

Offline John Mytton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4236
Don?t we? What do you conclude from CE1952?

https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/html/WH_Vol23_0394b.htm


Cropped close-ups:



Thanks Colin, it looks like one of Alan's theories needs some major reconstruction. "funny emoticon"



JohnM

JFK Assassination Forum


Offline Alan Ford

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4820
Thanks Colin, it looks like one of Alan's theories needs some major reconstruction. "funny emoticon"



JohnM

 :D

Mr Mytton against demonstrates the dangers of not reading the thread before jumping in with a clueless contribution...

-----------I pointed out these anomalies between the two forms back on March 6!

 Thumb1:


Offline Colin Crow

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1860
I think the least we can conclude is that Day was not adverse to altering documentation. Knock me over with a feather.

I can now think of a reason to fingerprint the rods in the Paine garage. If the rods were originally stored in a bag and Oswald?s prints were on rods 275 and/or 276 it might suggest he used that bag (and possibly other rods if there were originally more than 2).

JFK Assassination Forum


Offline John Mytton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4236
:D

Mr Mytton against demonstrates the dangers of not reading the thread before jumping in with a clueless contribution...

-----------I pointed out these anomalies between the two forms back on March 6!

 Thumb1:

Geez Alan, why is every one of your posts overloaded with sarcasm and/or insults, could it be because you yourself know that your "theory" requires supporting evidence that you don't have? From a wrong date you've extrapolated an entire industry! Btw Denis has already thoroughly embarrassed you by revealing some of your prior posts and now you suggest that somewhere within your history we will find all the answers?, talk about delusions of grandeur!

As I said in my first post, I don't believe that the document was written in real time from top to bottom.
Colin was right in saying that the document was written about the time of when he had to give his WC testimony, so in essence Lt Day had his normal day to day activities, on top of his JFK investigation and then he had to prepare for court.

What I see is for whatever reason Day simply wrote when he received the curtain rods from Howlett, early the next day the 24th at 7:50 AM, in the wrong place. Then at some later stage Day filled the rest in red and just went by memory or some scrambled notes and picked a date before the 24th, how could Day know that some one like Alan would come along and place so much importance on some insignificant date when clearly all Day was worried about is the actual evidence.



JohnM
« Last Edit: April 19, 2019, 12:31:19 AM by John Mytton »

Offline John Mytton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4236
I think the least we can conclude is that Day was not adverse to altering documentation.

Sure the date was altered but why would he remove his signature just to sign it again?



JohnM

JFK Assassination Forum


Offline Tim Nickerson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1824
Don?t we? What do you conclude from CE1952?

https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/html/WH_Vol23_0394b.htm


Cropped close-ups:



I conclude that CE1952 is a very poor photocopy of a document that was copied before John Howlett signed it a second time. It's similar to the following: