Shells, rifle, SN... Who?

[Walt Cakebread]

So how did Weitzman describe the rifle? In his affidavit, he said this: "The rifle was a 7.65 Mauser bolt-action rifle equipped with a 4/18 scope, a thick leather brownish-black sling on it."

And in the FBI report describing Constable Weitzman's excellent adventure, the rifle is described thus:

"a 7.65 Mauser bolt-action rifle which loads from a five shot clip which is locked on the underside of the receiver forward of the trigger guard. The metal parts of this rifle were of a gun metal color, gray or blue, and the rear portion of the bolt was visibly worn. The wooden portions of this rifle were a dark brown color and of rough wood, apparently having been used or damaged a considerable extent. This rifle was equipped with a four-power 18 scope  of apparent Japanese manufacture. It was also equipped with a thick, brown-black leather bandolier type sling."

Most of the described detail is nothing that anyone couldn't pick up in Weitzman's putative glance. The color of the stock and it's well-worn, rough appearance are nothing that can't be picked up in that first look at the rifle. Same with the color of the metal -- it's a gun that happens to be imaginatively described as being a "gun metal color." Weitzman's attempt to be more specific does little better: "gray or blue" --he can't even settle on a particular hue. The sling is "thick," "leather," and "brownish-black," none of which require any study beyond that first glance to figure out. So far, we have a very generic, if well-used, rifle.

Here's where it gets interesting. He is fairly specific about the scope. It's 4 x 18, and of "apparent Japanese manufacture." So how would he have known? Easy. That information is printed on the scope in big white letters on a black background for easy reading:


 
Now, there's one particular feature of the rifle that Weitzman decided to call out. "A five shot clip which is locked on the underside of the receiver forward of the trigger guard." Kinda like this:



What you're looking at here is the action of a Mauser Model 1891, often known as an Argentine Mauser. The model 1889/1890/1891 Mausers (all essentially the same design) have that fixed single-stack magazine extending down below the forestock. They are the only Mauser rifles with that magazine configuration. The previous models had a  tubular magazine, and later ones (from the model 1893 on) were made with a double-stack magazine that didn't extend beneath the forestock. And all of the 1889/1890/1891 Mausers were chambered at the factory in 7.65x53. Single stack magazines fell out of favor in the bolt action world in the 1890's. Most post-WWI designs were derived from the Model 98, including it's more compact, double stack magazine.

As I've said previously, the Argentine government began to unload it's old bolt action rifles for surplus in the late '50s. A lot of these rifles wound up in the US, where they were picked up by budget-conscious shooters. Someone who had run into an Argentine Mauser, but had no particular exposure to the larger world of surplus bolt action rifles, could easily have seen a Carcano with it's prominent single stack magazine and assumed that it was one of the Argentine rifles based on that feature alone. And once they decided that, they "knew" that the rifle would have been chambered in 7.65 Mauser.
I think it was something more like, Curry said that the FBI hadn't told the DPD about Oswald at one of Curry's impromptu new conferences. Then, news stories beganto appear regarding "sources in the Dallas Police" who claimed that the FBI admitted that they knew Oswald could be a threat, which is a bit different from what Curry told the press.  Of course, that brought a on a mighty thundering cloudburst of wrath from The J Edgar. Curry wound up saying that the FBI had not told anyone in the DPD that the FBI considered Oswald a threat to JFK. The whole issue turns on a single conversation between Hosty and Revill. Revill always maintained that Hosty told him that the FBI knew LHO could be a threat. Hosty maintained until his death that Revill's accusation was simply untrue. If only someone had been there to film the conversation, like Alyea recording the discovery of the rifle! ;-P

Most of the described detail is nothing that anyone couldn't pick up in Weitzman's putative glance. The color of the stock and it's well-worn, rough appearance are nothing that can't be picked up in that first look at the rifle. Same with the color of the metal -- it's a gun that happens to be imaginatively described as being a "gun metal color." Weitzman's attempt to be more specific does little better: "gray or blue" --he can't even settle on a particular hue. The sling is "thick," "leather," and "brownish-black," none of which require any study beyond that first glance to figure out. So far, we have a very generic, if well-used, rifle.

 Weitzman's description of a rifle does not appear to be what could be expected from a quick glance at the rifle.    Particularly if the rifle was a carcano.  Weitzman's detailed description seems to be the result of a hands on examination of a 7.65 Mauser. 

I've been hoping to discuss FBI agent A1bert Sawyers report with an intelligent and  knowledgeable  person for a long time.....It appears to me that Seymour Weitzman was given a 7.65 Mauser and asked to describe it......Which he did.     It's kind interesting that One of the first things that alerted me to the idea that he was not describing the quick glance at a 6.5mm Mannlicher Carcano was the "worn bolt" of the rifle....I fail to see how Weitzman could have noticed some thing that didn't exist on the Carcano....  ( the bolt is not noticeably worn)   And another thing that caught my attention was the description of the leather sling....Which Weitzman described as "thick, brownish black leather.....  I've seen many old leather slings on old military rifles and   Weitzman's  description does fit my observation of those old slings.....Particularly the old German slings.   But his description does NOT fit the sling on the TSBD carcano.....  That "Sling" is not a sling at all....It is a rather light duty carrying strap with a with shoulder pad attached to it....  It appears to have been made for use by a sentry who had to stand long hours of guard duty with the rifle on his shoulder.   And it is not what I would call "brownish black".....  It is black      The finished side of the strap is BLACK ...and of course the unfinished side is rough tan leather.

[John Iacoletti]

That's a good point, Walt.  It's one thing to say "I glanced at it and it looked like a Mauser".  It's quite another thing to give a detailed description that doesn't actually fit the thing supposedly being described.

[Walt Cakebread]

He filmed somebody picking it up off the floor.  That doesn't mean it was the moment it was discovered.

He filmed somebody picking it up off the floor.  That doesn't mean it was the moment it was discovered.

Surely you recognize Detective JC  Day as the man picking up the carcano.....   And yes you're right ...Weitznan and Boone had discovered the carcano about 10 or 15 minutes prior to Day picking up the rifle.  So it was discovered sometime prior to Alyea's filming the removal of the rifle.

[Gary Craig]

Can you tell me exactly what those photos have to do with what I'd said?

BTW, if you've been around milsurps for a bit and look closely, you'll notice the tool marks where some took a grinder to the top of the receivers on the top two rifles (it's easier to see on the second photo).  That's because the Argentine government required that their military rifles have the national crest removed from their surplus firearms before they could sold for export. The "7.65 Mauser" was added decades after the rifles' manufacture. The Gun Control Act of 1968 was passed in reaction to RFK's assassination.  One of it's provisions was that imported firearms were required to have the caliber engraved on the weapon after 1968. In the two top cases, you're looking at the result.   

The bottom example is a k98 made during the Nazi era. There is no "7.65" (it would be chambered for 8mm x 57), so I have no idea what you're getting at.

"you'll notice the tool marks where some took a grinder to the top of the receivers on the top two rifles (it's easier to see on the second photo).  That's because the Argentine government required that their military rifles have the national crest removed from their surplus firearms before they could sold for export."

Yes, you're correct. Argentina started grinding their national crest off exported rifles in the 1930's.

https://gunsinthenews.com/1891-argentine-mauser-history/

"Collectors in the U.S., though, often find the national crest ground off of Argentine 1891 Mausers. This was done in the aftermath of the Chaco War of 1935, which pitted Bolivia and Paraguay against one another in a vicious albeit brief struggle for control of South America’s resource-rich Chaco Boreal. Argentina provided Paraguay with a large number of Model 1891 Mausers during the conflict in a move that jeopardized its relationship with Bolivia. The presence of unground national crests made it impossible to deny Argentina’s direct support for Paraguay, so after the war Argentina instituted a law requiring the removal of the national crest from any gun leaving the country. Although the government in Buenos Aires later dropped this requirement, by then most of the Argentine 1891 Mausers had been ground, and this accounts for why it is rare to find one with the crest intact."

The "7.65 Mauser" was added decades after the rifles' manufacture. The Gun Control Act of 1968 was passed in reaction to RFK's assassination.  One of it's provisions was that imported firearms were required to have the caliber engraved on the weapon after 1968.

That doesn't mean 7.65 wasn't added to any exported rifles before 1968. Seems like it would be a natural to add it to the place where the national crest was was ground off the rifles.

 Also, since the majority of the Argentine '91 7.65 rifles imported into the US had the national crest ground off, and Boone and Weitzman were, according to you and most WC apologists, making a guess after a quick glance, could you show me the area on the TSBD Carcano where the crest was ground off that would have given them that impression?

[Walt Cakebread]

That's a good point, Walt.  It's one thing to say "I glanced at it and it looked like a Mauser".  It's quite another thing to give a detailed description that doesn't actually fit the thing supposedly being described.

Thank you, John.....Now here's something that I never would have known if Mitch hadn't posted such nice clear colored photos of the Carcano carrying strap....



The official tale regarding the carrying strap says that Lee Oswald made the strap from an old US Air Force pistol holster...... The photo that Mitch posted shows the rivets are European type rivets....  Did the US Air Force purchase equipment from European manufacturers ??    And if Lee made the strap....would he have use European rivets?   And how long does it take for verdigris to form? ....     There is verdigris  on the rivets? 

[John Iacoletti]

I didn't even know there were European type rivets...

[Bill Chapman]

And why the hell would Oswald even need a jacket when it was barely 1:00 in the afternoon in hot ass Texas? He was already wearing a long sleeve flannel shirt, which he was arrested in.

Dallas temp was about 50°F (10°C) with gusty winds, and note that people were wearing jackets, overcoats. etc.

[Jack Trojan]

He filmed somebody picking it up off the floor.  That doesn't mean it was the moment it was discovered.

Surely you recognize Detective JC  Day as the man picking up the carcano.....   And yes you're right ...Weitznan and Boone had discovered the carcano about 10 or 15 minutes prior to Day picking up the rifle.  So it was discovered sometime prior to Alyea's filming the removal of the rifle.

So Walt, do you still think there was absolutely, positively no Mauser? And if you think Weitzman actually did handle a Mauser, then don't you owe Roger Craig an apology for calling him a mental case and for wanting to piss on his grave?