Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: A straight line  (Read 112024 times)

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: A straight line
« Reply #216 on: March 02, 2018, 10:39:33 PM »
Advertisement
Oswald denied everything
Marina wasn't in the sniper nest at the time

You sure are a slippery one.  You invoke Marina's amused reaction to the backyard photos to support your notion that Oswald kept the scope on the rifle to look like a sniper when Marina never saw a scope on the rifle. Then you divert back to the sniper's nest, even though you were the one trying to use the backyard photos to make your point.  So much for requiring a scope on a rifle to look like a sniper though.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: A straight line
« Reply #216 on: March 02, 2018, 10:39:33 PM »


Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: A straight line
« Reply #217 on: March 02, 2018, 10:44:34 PM »
Show us where I claim the BY scene is proof of murder
Show us where I have claimed that any single factor on its own is proof of murder

My earlier post:
"However, brandishing a rifle, with pistol on his hip, decked out in all-black getup, clutching commie literature* and posing for the camera might suggest that which you dismiss so easily may be not so far off the mark after all"

Show us where I have ever claimed that I could prove Oswald was the killer

Where did all that come from?  The thing I was responding to was your quote that I helpfully included in the text of my response.


Of course you and your trollmates would think it a lame excuse. After all, both of you busybodies are here to protect the killer of JFK.

"the killer of JFK" is the thing you're assuming to be true in order to make your argument for it being true.

Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6513
Re: A straight line
« Reply #218 on: March 03, 2018, 12:03:57 AM »
Without getting a single print on the stock, barrel, bolt, scope, clip and ammo.

Barrel, inside the stock
Carcano stock too rough to hold useable prints
Technology now exists that helps find useable prints on spent shell casings, even when prints have wiped off.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: A straight line
« Reply #218 on: March 03, 2018, 12:03:57 AM »


Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7395
Re: A straight line
« Reply #219 on: March 03, 2018, 12:06:41 AM »
Barrel, inside the stock
Carcano stock too rough to hold useable prints
Technology now exists that helps find useable prints on spent shell casings, even when prints have wiped off.

Technology now exists that helps find useable prints on spent shell casings, even when prints have wiped off.


Great. Now all you need is a time machine.

Online Andrew Mason

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1229
    • SPMLaw
Re: A straight line
« Reply #220 on: March 03, 2018, 12:14:09 AM »
Your assumption is false as even the FBI said that no one but LHO was listed to receive mail at his Dallas P.O. Box.
Do you have a cite for that? Harry Holmes, Chief Inspector of the US Postal Service for Dallas, stated that the Part 3 of the post office box application form contained a list of other people authorized to receive mail at that box and that Part 3 was thrown away (in accordance with post office practice) when the box was closed in May 1963. So, the fact is that we do not know who else may have been listed to receive mail in Box 2915, Dallas in March 1963.  Here is his testimony (7 H 527):

MR. LIEBELER -- "So there is no way, as I understand it, to tell from the records maintained, as far as you know anyway, who was authorized to receive mail at Post Office Box 2915 that Oswald had while he was here in Dallas before he went to New Orleans in April of 1963; is that correct?"

MR. HOLMES -- "Other than Oswald himself and his name on the application."

....


JFK Assassination Forum

Re: A straight line
« Reply #220 on: March 03, 2018, 12:14:09 AM »


Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: A straight line
« Reply #221 on: March 03, 2018, 12:16:08 AM »
Do you have a cite for that? Harry Holmes, Chief Inspector of the US Postal Service for Dallas, stated that the Part 3 of the post office box application form contained a list of other people authorized to receive mail at that box and that Part 3 was thrown away (in accordance with post office practice) when the box was closed in May 1963. So, the fact is that we do not know who else may have been listed to receive mail in Box 2915, Dallas in March 1963.  Here is his testimony (7 H 527):

MR. LIEBELER -- "So there is no way, as I understand it, to tell from the records maintained, as far as you know anyway, who was authorized to receive mail at Post Office Box 2915 that Oswald had while he was here in Dallas before he went to New Orleans in April of 1963; is that correct?"

MR. HOLMES -- "Other than Oswald himself and his name on the application."

....

I already posted it 6 posts above this.  Look for CE 2585.

Online Andrew Mason

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1229
    • SPMLaw
Re: A straight line
« Reply #222 on: March 03, 2018, 12:23:00 AM »
Not before the FBI saw them apparently.

Are you suggesting that the FBI saw Part 3 and then destroyed it? You will need some evidence because the Post Office said that Part 3 was thrown away in May 1963 when the box was closed. The likely explanation for the FBI memo is that they retrieved the first part of the application and assumed that since there were no other persons listed or no part 3 present that there were no others registered to receive mail.  That would, of courese, be incorrect, as Holmes explained.  The fact that the only remaining Part 3 of a post office box application made by Oswald lists Hidell and Marina as persons entitled to receive mail at that box is interesting.  In the end it does not matter. We know that the rifle and gun were sent to that box and that Oswald was in possession of them. We know this from Marina and the BY photos.


Quote
What mail?  And don't say the rifle, because that would be a circular argument!  However, see the above.
What is circular about the fact that Klein's sent the rifle to Oswald's PO box under Hidell's name and the fact that the rifle was in Oswald's possession?

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: A straight line
« Reply #222 on: March 03, 2018, 12:23:00 AM »


Offline John Mytton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4236
Re: A straight line
« Reply #223 on: March 03, 2018, 12:28:28 AM »
Not before the FBI saw them apparently.








Where does it say the FBI saw anything?


What does exist is Oswald's New Orleans Post Office Application and we can all see Oswald's previous behaviour.





JohnM