Shells, rifle, SN... Who?

[Walt Cakebread]

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?

Roger Craig...LIED and said that the carcano was actually a mauser.....   I never said that there was no mauser involved "somewhere" in the pile of information  / dis- information.  I think I've been clear on my position that the rifle that Weitzman and Boone discovered  was a 6.5mm Mannlicher Carcano.

Roger Craig is responsible for many shallow reasoning individuals who  spew the garbage that the rifle was a  Mauser....  Craig lied, and people who refuse to extract their heads and open their EYES, and LOOK, at Tom Alyea's film,  believed Roger Craig...

No, I absolutely DO NOT owe Roger Craig an apology.....

[Jack Trojan]

Roger Craig...LIED and said that the carcano was actually a mauser.....   I never said that was no mauser involved "somewhere" in the pile of information  / dis- information.  I think I've been clear on my position that the rifle that Weitzman and Boone discovered  was a 6.5mm Mannlicher Carcano.

Roger Craig is responsible for many shallow reasoning individuals who  spew the garbage that the rifle was a  Mauser....  Craig lied, and people who refuse to extract their heads and open their EYES, and LOOK, at Tom Alyea's film,  believed Roger Craig...

No, I absolutely DO NOT owe Roger Craig an apology.....

Why don't you want to piss on Weitzman's, Day's and Fritz's graves then, if lying is your only criteria for calling Craig a mental case? You must despise Trump then.

ps. Why do you keep insisting that Craig was referring to the rifle in the film, especially when there could have been 2 rifles found in the TSBD? Was a Mauser a standard DPD issued weapon? If there was a Mauser found at the scene, then Houston, we have  problem. Isn't that more important than your obsession with Craig being a liar?

[Walt Cakebread]

Why don't you want to piss on Weitzman's, Day's and Fritz's graves then, if lying is your only criteria for calling Craig a mental case? You must despise Trump then.

ps. Why do you keep insisting that Craig was referring to the rifle in the film, especially when there could have been 2 rifles found in the TSBD? Was a Mauser a standard DPD issued weapon? If there was a Mauser found at the scene, then Houston, we have  problem. Isn't that more important than your obsession with Craig being a liar?

Why do you keep insisting that Craig was referring to the rifle in the film, especially when there could have been 2 rifles found in the TSBD?

Are you now backing away from your position that Roger Craig was referring to the rifle that he saw Detective Day and Captain Fritz examining just seconds after Detective Day picked the rifle off the floor?

Roger Craig said that he was right there at the time and he saw "stamped right there on the barrel....7.65 Mauser"....

Tom Alyea filmed that same scene.....And roger Craig can be seen in the BACKGROUND ....He's NOT right there where he would be able to read any stamping on the rifle.   And furthermore...Tom Alyea's film clearly shows that the rifle being examined by Day and Fritz is with out any doubt a Mannlicher Carcano.

There MAY( a possibility)  have been a Mauser in the TSBD that afternnon....But Roger Craig never saw it....  Craig said that he heard that a mauser had been found on the roof ( where it had been dropped by some law enforcement officer)    Now that's an absurd story if there ever was one....Can you imagine an officer dropping a rifle and then just leaving it where it had fallen???.....   

I'll make ya deal Jack....  You go ahead and believe these fantastic tales....But don't expect me to debate them with you.....

PS...  I despise Roger Craig because he definitely had solid evidence that is vital to this case , but he destroyed his credibility by telling absurd lies.

[Walt Cakebread]

What about Roger Craig? Was he a damned liar too? Why would a conspirator lie about reading "7.65 Mauser" off the barrel of the rifle? He was obviously not "in on it" so why do you think he was lying?

If Craig was telling the truth, then there were 2 rifles and Alyea didn't film the Mauser. Otherwise, if ANY shots came from the SN then it was NOT from the Carcano because that was the patsy rifle that was pre-planted as were the hulls. Or do you still believe that the MC was used in the assassination?

If Craig was telling the truth, then there were 2 rifles and Alyea didn't film the Mauser. Otherwise, if ANY shots came from the SN then it was NOT from the Carcano because that was the patsy rifle that was pre-planted as were the hulls. Or do you still believe that the MC was used in the assassination?

You're right Tom Alyea did NOT film anybody with a Mauser.....   He filmed Detective JC Day examining a Mannlicher Carcano.

if ANY shots came from the SN then it was NOT from the Carcano

There were no shots fired from what was imaginatively referred to as a "Sniper's Nest"....  And you're right , The Carcano that was discovered where it had been well hidden was never fired that day.

the patsy rifle that was pre-planted as were the hulls.

You're right....The Mannlicher Carcano was planted by hiding it beneath boxes of books PRIOR to the shooting, just as the spent shells were planted beneath the window PRIOR to the shooting.  The Mannlicher Carcano was not fired that day.

do you still believe that the MC was used in the assassination?

I have long maintained that the Carcano was never fired on 11/22/63......  You apparently are confusing me with some other person.

[Walt Cakebread]

Why don't you want to piss on Weitzman's, Day's and Fritz's graves then, if lying is your only criteria for calling Craig a mental case? You must despise Trump then.

ps. Why do you keep insisting that Craig was referring to the rifle in the film, especially when there could have been 2 rifles found in the TSBD? Was a Mauser a standard DPD issued weapon? If there was a Mauser found at the scene, then Houston, we have  problem. Isn't that more important than your obsession with Craig being a liar?

Why do you keep insisting that Craig was referring to the rifle in the film,

Here ya go Jack....Listen to Roger....and see if can answer your question.

At 10:25 notice that Roger says that He and Luke mooney found the spent shells beneath the window.    Was Craig with mooney when the shells were discovered?
At 13:15 Roger says that they weren't more than six inches from the rifle, As Fritz held it, and "right there on the barrel was stamped 7.65 Mauser.."..
 Get yourself a bag of popcorn, and sit back and watch the movie of an unabashed liar spinning his tale....

 

[Mitch Todd]

Wow!...an excellent post Mitch.....You've raised many debatable points and I think that's great! 

Let's start with you last statement first.....

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.

Revill immediately wrote a memo to his boss Captain Gannaway after Hosty imparted the information to him at about 2:50 pm .    I seriously doubt that Revill would have immediately notified Captain Gannaway if Hosty hadn't told him exactly what Revill said he did.  Revill was one of the good cops on the DPD, while Hosty worked for the most corrupt and evil monster (JEH) that ever held high office in the US..   

Like I said, it comes down to what Hosty actually told Revill, and by extension how Revill related that to Gannaway. The point of contention in Revills memo is pretty non-specific: "they [FBI] had information that this subject was capable of committing the assassination of President Kennedy." Exactly what that means is anyone's guess. In one sense, anyone this side of Stephen Hawking would be "capable of committing the assassination." Only Hosty and Revill really know. The original point is that the subject that Curry backed down on wasn't what he'd said in the press conference, which was that the FBI hadn't told the DPD that Oswald was in town.

Now to the part of your post that has me most excited....

"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."

It seems clear to me that Weitzman actually had a 7.65 Mauser in his hands as he examined it and described it.   He's NOT describing the 6.5mm Carcano that was discovered beneath the boxes on the sixth floor of the TSBD.   It appears that Weitzman was handed a 7.65 Mauser and asked to describe it.   

Where did Weitzman ever say that he was handed, or ever held, the rifle? Where did anyone else not named Roger Craig ever said they saw Weitzman handed, or ever held the, rifle? Who claimed that they saw two rifles found in the depository?

Let's parse Weitzman's description.

"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."

A five shot clip .... The Carcano uses a six shot clip......  And it does NOT lock on the underside of the receiver.   The Carcano six cartridge clip loads from the top of the receiver.

To begin with, "clip" in itself isn't a particularly specific term. Using "clip" in the sense of "en bloc  clip," Mausers simply don't use them. The Carcano uses a clip that locks into the magazine somewhere below the receiver. When the last round is chambered, the sides of the clip collapse inwards, unlocking it and (hopefully) allowing it to fall through the hole in the bottom of the magazine. Doesn't always work that way, but that's the design. This usage fits, combines with the Carcano's operating system fits Sawyer's description of a "clip which is locked on the underside of the receiver forward of the trigger guard."

Using "clip" in the sense of "stripper clip," yes, Mausers use those, but they don't lock into anything, especially on the underside of the receiver. There's a guide notch for it cut into the top of the receiver, but that's at the top, not the bottom. And it doesn't lock anything in place.  This usage, combined with the Mauser operating system, does not fit Sawyer's "clip which is locked on the underside of the receiver forward of the trigger guard."

Finally, there's "clip" in the sense of "a magazine from which ammunition is fed into the chamber of a firearm," as Mirriam-Webster says. Quite a few people use the term this way. As I've already mentioned, the Mauser model 91's have a magazine that is definitely "locked" and very conspicuously located "on the underside of the receiver forward of the trigger guard." That fits a model 91 Mauser very well, and (again) the underslung magazine is a feature that the Carcano shares.

Of the three possibilities for the definition of clip, the "Mauser-only," stripper clip explanation is the one that just doesn't work. Myself, I find it interesting that of all of the rifle's mechanical features that could be brought out, it's the magazine that gets emphasized. That strengthens the "clip=magazine" conclusion quite a bit.

Now, on the to the five-round vs six round thing. Is it a Mauser because Weitzman saw five rounds in the magazine, or did Weitzman first decide that the rifle was a Mauser, therefore it had a five-round capacity? The first possibility leads to something of a problem: if the magazine held five rounds, and Fritz ejected on from the chamber, then that rifle couldn't have fired a shot. And where did anyone say Weitzman or anyone else emptied the magazine? Or, in an alternative silliness, Did Weitzman just happen to have a fistful of ammunition of the proper caliber, and decided to top the rifle off to determine it's capacity? Neither of those "five rounds first" scenarios are satisfying. Nor is there any evidence to support them: who claimed that anyone did anything to check the magazine capacity on the rifle? The only explanation still standing is the Mauser-first one: Once Weitzman decided the rifle was a Mauser, then it held five rounds because Mausers hold five rounds. And that means the number of rounds described simply isn't probative.

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 metal of the TSBD carcano is a very definite dark blue......And the rear portion of the bolt is NOT visibly worn.  However the metal of a mauser is gray colored.

Here I am bursting your bubble:

"Gun metal color, gray or blue" comes from Sayers' 11/23 report. Boone's 11/22 report says the rifle was blued. Weitzman was asked by the WC whether it was gray or blue, and he replied "blue."
So we have gray or blue, blue, and blue. That doesn't add up to gray. However, you're wrong about Mausers being gray. On '91's, the barrel, receiver, trigger, trigger guard, and magazine are all blued. Only the bolt was left au naturel. Most Mausers I've seen are that way. The exceptions that I've seen are K98K's made during WWII, and that may be due to the good ol' wartime finish, especially later in the war. My '91 was definitely blued at the factory.

The wooden portions of this rifle were a dark brown color and of rough wood,

The wood of the TSBD Carcano is NOT rough.....The wood is not highly polished but it's not "rough"  The carcano has an oil finish.....

apparently having been used or damaged a considerable extent.

You've seen photos of the TSBD carcano.....Do you think the stock is beat up,  does it appear to have scratches or gouges?

Lt Day thought the rifle's wooden parts were rough: "I noted that the stock was too rough apparently to take fingerprints."

One of the best high resolution photo sets of CE139 that I know of are maintained by the National Archives, and are stored here: https://catalog.archives.gov/id/305134. It's a javascript page, so I can't directly link the images. However, you have the advantage of being able to pan and zoom as much as you want.

Another JS-limited page is here Getty:

https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/passport-rifle-bullets-and-other-items-belonging-to-news-photo/50681899?adppopup=true 
https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/passport-rifle-bullets-and-other-items-belonging-to-news-photo/50681902?adppopup=true

Another couple, that I can link directly to:



The wood definitely looks rough, dinged, and scratched to me, especially near the butt ends of the stock. And the wear on the edges of the safety lever at the end of the bolt knob is apparent, as well as the wear on the bolt knob.

This rifle was equipped with a four-power 18 scope  of apparent Japanese manufacture.

This bit doesn't mean much.....except for the fact that the Scope on the TSBD carcano was CLEARLY marked as  Holly wood Optics,  having been manufactured in Japan ...so there would have been no reason to speculate.

It's not "Hollywood Optics" It's:

      4 x 18 COATED
ORDNANCE OPTICS INC
HOLLYWOOD CALIFORNIA

      010  JAPAN

Anyway, my point is that "4x18" and "JAPAN" are prominently printed on the scope in nice white letters on a black background. Easy to read without needing any real study.

It was also equipped with a thick, brown-black leather bandolier type sling."

The TSBD carcano was NOT equipped with a thick "brown black" leather sling.....and it was NOT a bandoleer type sling ....

On the leather bandolier rifle slings I've seen, the bandolier part is a fat piece that is attached to the sling proper. Like what these guys sell:

https://brassstacker.com/Rifle-Sling-and-Cartridge-Bandolier-1.html

I figure that's because the sling has to be able to be comfortably wrapped around you forearm, and a leather bandolier would be too bulky and stiff to do that.  I figure someone saw the fat oval part of the "sling" and took it from there to bandolierland.

I hope you will accept my post in the vein intended....I'm certainly not attacking you....I'm merely pointing out that it looks to me like Weitzman was describing a 7.65 Mauser.

Well, honestly, it's nice to be appreciated.

[John Iacoletti]

Roger Craig said that he was right there at the time and he saw "stamped right there on the barrel....7.65 Mauser"....

Tom Alyea filmed that same scene.....And roger Craig can be seen in the BACKGROUND ....He's NOT right there where he would be able to read any stamping on the rifle. 

How do you know that Craig was taking about the same sequence that Alyea filmed? Also please point out Craig in the Alyea film. That’s a new one on me.

I'll make ya deal Jack....  You go ahead and believe these fantastic tales....

You mean like “red signal rings”, Stetson hats, and airplane signaling electric razors?

[Walt Cakebread]

Like I said, it comes down to what Hosty actually told Revill, and by extension how Revill related that to Gannaway. The point of contention in Revills memo is pretty non-specific: "they [FBI] had information that this subject was capable of committing the assassination of President Kennedy." Exactly what that means is anyone's guess. In one sense, anyone this side of Stephen Hawking would be "capable of committing the assassination." Only Hosty and Revill really know. The original point is that the subject that Curry backed down on wasn't what he'd said in the press conference, which was that the FBI hadn't told the DPD that Oswald was in town.

Where did Weitzman ever say that he was handed, or ever held, the rifle? Where did anyone else not named Roger Craig ever said they saw Weitzman handed, or ever held the, rifle? Who claimed that they saw two rifles found in the depository?
To begin with, "clip" in itself isn't a particularly specific term. Using "clip" in the sense of "en bloc  clip," Mausers simply don't use them. The Carcano uses a clip that locks into the magazine somewhere below the receiver. When the last round is chambered, the sides of the clip collapse inwards, unlocking it and (hopefully) allowing it to fall through the hole in the bottom of the magazine. Doesn't always work that way, but that's the design. This usage fits, combines with the Carcano's operating system fits Sawyer's description of a "clip which is locked on the underside of the receiver forward of the trigger guard."

Using "clip" in the sense of "stripper clip," yes, Mausers use those, but they don't lock into anything, especially on the underside of the receiver. There's a guide notch for it cut into the top of the receiver, but that's at the top, not the bottom. And it doesn't lock anything in place.  This usage, combined with the Mauser operating system, does not fit Sawyer's "clip which is locked on the underside of the receiver forward of the trigger guard."

Finally, there's "clip" in the sense of "a magazine from which ammunition is fed into the chamber of a firearm," as Mirriam-Webster says. Quite a few people use the term this way. As I've already mentioned, the Mauser model 91's have a magazine that is definitely "locked" and very conspicuously located "on the underside of the receiver forward of the trigger guard." That fits a model 91 Mauser very well, and (again) the underslung magazine is a feature that the Carcano shares.

Of the three possibilities for the definition of clip, the "Mauser-only," stripper clip explanation is the one that just doesn't work. Myself, I find it interesting that of all of the rifle's mechanical features that could be brought out, it's the magazine that gets emphasized. That strengthens the "clip=magazine" conclusion quite a bit.

Now, on the to the five-round vs six round thing. Is it a Mauser because Weitzman saw five rounds in the magazine, or did Weitzman first decide that the rifle was a Mauser, therefore it had a five-round capacity? The first possibility leads to something of a problem: if the magazine held five rounds, and Fritz ejected on from the chamber, then that rifle couldn't have fired a shot. And where did anyone say Weitzman or anyone else emptied the magazine? Or, in an alternative silliness, Did Weitzman just happen to have a fistful of ammunition of the proper caliber, and decided to top the rifle off to determine it's capacity? Neither of those "five rounds first" scenarios are satisfying. Nor is there any evidence to support them: who claimed that anyone did anything to check the magazine capacity on the rifle? The only explanation still standing is the Mauser-first one: Once Weitzman decided the rifle was a Mauser, then it held five rounds because Mausers hold five rounds. And that means the number of rounds described simply isn't probative.
Here I am bursting your bubble:

"Gun metal color, gray or blue" comes from Sayers' 11/23 report. Boone's 11/22 report says the rifle was blued. Weitzman was asked by the WC whether it was gray or blue, and he replied "blue."
So we have gray or blue, blue, and blue. That doesn't add up to gray. However, you're wrong about Mausers being gray. On '91's, the barrel, receiver, trigger, trigger guard, and magazine are all blued. Only the bolt was left au naturel. Most Mausers I've seen are that way. The exceptions that I've seen are K98K's made during WWII, and that may be due to the good ol' wartime finish, especially later in the war. My '91 was definitely blued at the factory.
Lt Day thought the rifle's wooden parts were rough: "I noted that the stock was too rough apparently to take fingerprints."

One of the best high resolution photo sets of CE139 that I know of are maintained by the National Archives, and are stored here: https://catalog.archives.gov/id/305134. It's a javascript page, so I can't directly link the images. However, you have the advantage of being able to pan and zoom as much as you want.

Another JS-limited page is here Getty:

https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/passport-rifle-bullets-and-other-items-belonging-to-news-photo/50681899?adppopup=true 
https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/passport-rifle-bullets-and-other-items-belonging-to-news-photo/50681902?adppopup=true

Another couple, that I can link directly to:



The wood definitely looks rough, dinged, and scratched to me, especially near the butt ends of the stock. And the wear on the edges of the safety lever at the end of the bolt knob is apparent, as well as the wear on the bolt knob.

It's not "Hollywood Optics" It's:

      4 x 18 COATED
ORDNANCE OPTICS INC
HOLLYWOOD CALIFORNIA

      010  JAPAN

Anyway, my point is that "4x18" and "JAPAN" are prominently printed on the scope in nice white letters on a black background. Easy to read without needing any real study.

 
On the leather bandolier rifle slings I've seen, the bandolier part is a fat piece that is attached to the sling proper. Like what these guys sell:

https://brassstacker.com/Rifle-Sling-and-Cartridge-Bandolier-1.html

I figure that's because the sling has to be able to be comfortably wrapped around you forearm, and a leather bandolier would be too bulky and stiff to do that.  I figure someone saw the fat oval part of the "sling" and took it from there to bandolierland.
Well, honestly, it's nice to be appreciated.

A bandoleer type sling is a sling that will hold a few cartridge in loops on the sling ....Just a a bandoleer cartridge pistol belt is one that has loops to hold extra cartridges.