3 x 5 Index Card that is item # 14 On the List

[Jack Trojan]

The controvery of the Minox camera comes to mind. Obviously, had there been a list, they simply could have checked, right?

They didn't discover the spy camera until after they had released the evidence to the FBI.... They found it when they started searching Lee Oswald's Sea bags... And they had no legal right to search his personal luggage....They placed a placard by the stuff that had been in his sea bag that said the items were " Vountarily Given (to the) DALLAS PD by Ruth Paine and Mrs Oswald   Paine residence Irving Tex  11-22-63 " 

Mrs Paine had no legal right to give any of Lee Oswald's personal belongings to anybody....And Marina wouldn't have understood anything about an American citizen's rights regarding illegal search and seizure....

IMO, the Minox camera took the money shot CE-133A and CE-133BCDEF... was taken with the piss-poor Imperial Reflex. You can see the difference between the 2 cameras in the following graphic:



This is another smoking gun. These 2 pics were obviously not taken with the same camera. You might want to ask Marina about that.

[Walt Cakebread]

And The DPD and the FBI would have known that both parties required documentation of the evidence being released to the FBI.

Under normal circumstances that would indeed be true, but in this case the surreptitious transfer of the evidence to the FBI, only hours after the crime, was not normal and did not follow normal procedures. When it happened, Oswald was still alive, and this transfer of evidence would have created a massive chain of custody problem had the case ever gone to court. This IMO is also the reason why the evidence was returned to the DPD the next day and why it was formally collected from them again a few days later. I think a case can be made for not documenting such a surreptitious transfer.

But, if the list was made for the purpose of the release of the evidence to the FBI, wouldn't one expect to find the signature of Drain on the document? And what happened to a similar document that - if you are correct - must have existed for the return of the evidence on the 24th?

At any rate ...  The palm print tale is a damned lie.... The evidence list clearly shows that the so called palm print was on the evidence inventory list that was typed up on 11/22/63 .

But if it is indeed a lie, what do you think it is supposed to cover up?

in this case the surreptitious transfer of the evidence to the FBI, only hours after the crime, was not normal and did not follow normal procedures.


Why do you believe that the transfer of evidence was... " surreptitious"?    I'd certainly agree that it was probably an out of ordinary transfer of evidence.  In fact I doubt that all of the evidence in a case is ever transferred to the FBI....   It is routine for a PD to ask the FBI to exam a single piece of evidence ...but I doubt that there has ever been a case in which the FBI took over the investigation and demanded all of the evidence.

But I don't believe there was anything secret about the transfer.....

[Martin Weidmann]

in this case the surreptitious transfer of the evidence to the FBI, only hours after the crime, was not normal and did not follow normal procedures.


Why do you believe that the transfer of evidence was... " surreptitious"?    I'd certainly agree that it was probably an out of ordinary transfer of evidence.  In fact I doubt that all of the evidence in a case is ever transferred to the FBI....   It is routine for a PD to ask the FBI to exam a single piece of evidence ...but I doubt that there has ever been a case in which the FBI took over the investigation and demanded all of the evidence.

But I don't believe there was anything secret about the transfer.....

Why do you believe that the transfer of evidence was... " surreptitious"?

An undocumented, or badly documented, transfer of crucial evidence within less that 12 hours after the murder, with that evidence being returned within 24 hours is not surreptitious? C'mon Walt, you know better than that!

But I don't believe there was anything secret about the transfer.....

Fair enough, but how do you explain that there is no receipt for all the evidence turned over to the FBI signed by Drain or any other FBI officer? And why is there no similar document for the return of the evidence, a day later? To safeguard the chain of custody both documents would be required, yet they don't exist.

[Walt Cakebread]

Why do you believe that the transfer of evidence was... " surreptitious"?

An undocumented, or badly documented, transfer of crucial evidence within less that 12 hours after the murder, with that evidence being returned within 24 hours is not surreptitious? C'mon Walt, you know better than that!

But I don't believe there was anything secret about the transfer.....

Fair enough, but how do you explain that there is no receipt for all the evidence turned over to the FBI signed by Drain or any other FBI officer? And why is there no similar document for the return of the evidence, a day later? To safeguard the chain of custody both documents would be required, yet they don't exist.

how do you explain that there is no receipt for all the evidence turned over to the FBI

This is very easy for me to answer.... The conspirators were the authorities...  Any evidence they wanted to destroy... they destroyed.

   

[Walt Cakebread]

Walt, you are looking for contradictions between records and actions but you can't trust any of it. Like Trump, they flooded the zone with so much BS that you can't pin down the smoking gun.

IMO, the smoking gun is the way the evidence was handled. For example:



Are you shittin' me? Why was EVERYONE handling crucial crime scene evidence without gloves??? Several people including top dog Fritz handled the shell casings with their bare hands. Fritz even staged the crime scene by casually tossing the hulls onto the floor for a photo-op. Would any other agency have handled all the evidence like the DPD, let alone while investigating the murder of the POTUS in the crime of the century?

The DPD's handling of the evidence (including the BYPs) is but one of the smoking guns.

Can anybody in this forum enlarge the muzzle area of the rifle in this photo ? 
 


I'm particularly interested in the position of the slots in the screws that secure the bayonet lug and the front barrel band.....( three screws)

I'd bet the farm that these screws were never turned between the time this photo was taken at 6:17pm and 11/23/63 when the FBI received the rifle in the Crime Lab in Washington.    Lt Day swore that he disassembled the rifle shortly before the FBI took possession of the rifle. Lt  Day could not have disassembled the rifle unless he took those screws out.   I'd bet the farm that those screws are in the same positions as seen in this 6:17 pm photo and photos of the rifle in the FBI crime lab.

[Ray Mitcham]

Can anybody in this forum enlarge the muzzle area of the rifle in this photo ? 
 


I'm particularly interested in the position of the slots in the screws that secure the bayonet lug and the front barrel band.....( three screws)

I'd bet the farm that these screws were never turned between the time this photo was taken at 6:17pm and 11/23/63 when the FBI received the rifle in the Crime Lab in Washington.    Lt Day swore that he disassembled the rifle shortly before the FBI took possession of the rifle. Lt  Day could not have disassembled the rifle unless he took those screws out.   I'd bet the farm that those screws are in the same positions as seen in this 6:17 pm photo and photos of the rifle in the FBI crime lab.

This any help, Walt?

[Walt Cakebread]

This any help, Walt?

No , But thank you for your effort....  I hope someone who is a crackerjack whiz kid at enlarging a portion of a photo, can enlarge the front part of the rifle so the screw slots are visible.