Did Captain Fritz show Mr Oswald a Mauser?

[Bill Chapman]

Or that rifle.

Or that rifile.

You need evidence for a need?     You can either prove that Oswald did it or you cannot.  And you cannot.

Completely irrelevant, like everything you try to regale us with.

I've never said I could prove any of this, Neil. But then I don't need to anyway, since this is a discussion forum, not a court of law, Slick.

[John Iacoletti]

I've never said I could prove any of this, Neil. But then I don't need to anyway, since this is a discussion forum, not a court of law, Slick.

Sure, Mortimer, but a discussion is more that just telling us who you believe did it over and over again.  Oh yeah, and all of your "clever, cut-to-the-quick insights".

[Martin Weidmann]

I explain it as largely a figment of your imagination along with a false understanding of the evidence.  Now explain to me why your fantasy conspirators would leave a rifle that wasn't used in the crime to frame Oswald?  That is inexplicable.  Why not use the same rifle to commit the crime as they are going to leave at the scene and avoid the obvious complications involved in using a different rifle/ammo and having to somehow fake all that evidence.  It is absurd.  And there is no credible evidence that any other rifle was used or that Oswald's rifle was planted.  That is just a baseless "possibility" posed to avoid accepting the obvious conclusion from the actual evidence.

Earlier in this thread I wrote;

Can you also tell us what would constitute "evidence" that Oswald's rifle was fired on 11.22.63 that is lacking from the record?

Again, there is no evidence in the record that the MC rifle found at the TSBD was fired on 11/22/63. There is, however, in the record the fact that the barrel of the MC was not cleared of rust, which is what it should have been had a shot been fired. For some reason you seem to ignore that fact. One can only wonder why...

A day later Walt asked the same question, I asked previously;

So that's they only time the cartridges could have been fired from the carcano??   How do you explain the dirt and rust in the barrel, when three rounds would definitely have scoured any rust from the barrel.....

And your "answer" is;

I explain it as largely a figment of your imagination along with a false understanding of the evidence.

Which is not only complete BS but also shows how you deal with inconvenient facts in the record. You simply ignore them and dismiss them as a figment of imagination.....

Weak... very weak! But thanks for proving me right.

[Martin Weidmann]

Same old song and dance, indeed.  Your "mountain of evidence" is a mountain of conjecture, assumption, and false claims about the evidence.

Indeed, neither "Richard" or that clown, Chapman, for that matter are able to have a normal discussion about the evidence. All they do is repeat the same old weak and implausible narrative and ignore and dismiss anything that does not fit in that narrative. It reminds me of Albert Einstein's famous line: "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

[Richard Smith]

explain to me why your fantasy conspirators would leave a rifle that wasn't used in the crime to frame Oswald?

Duh.... The conspirators knew that they would need to plant a rifle like the one seen in Lee's hands in the BY photo.   And naturally the spent shells they had would need to be the type that fit the rifle.   It didn't make a damn bit of difference if the shells were freshly fired, or the rifle had been fired recently ....They were the conspirators and the investigators.   They could tell the trusting pissants anything and nobody would argue with them.   

The fact that you believe that the Carcano was the murder weapon in spite of the evidence that's been presented that indicates it could not have been the murder weapon is an excellent example of how simple, trusting and naive fools, can be tricked.

Now then try to use your little pea brain and explain how a rifle that allegedly had been fired just hours before it was examined and found to have rust and dirt in the barrel , could have that dirty and rusty bore?    Do you believe the tightly fitting, high velocity  bullets, wouldn't have scoured that bore.

And explain why not a single trained police officer detected any trace of he smell of burned gunpowder when the rifle was found?
If that rifle had been fired less than an hour earlier the smell of gunpowder down in that enclosure of boxes of books would have been very noticeable.

Please explain how a 5 ' 9", 135 pound, man could reach out and place the rifle at the bottom of a five foot deep well from five feet away.....??  And then stack a couple of boxes over the top of the "well" opening?

If you can answer the questions.... Then you MIGHT have a plausible case that the carcano was the murder weapon.   

 

So your explanation for why the fantasy conspirators used a different rifle to assassinate JFK than the rifle that was planted to frame Oswald is that they had to plant one to match the rifle in the BY photos!  HA HA HA.  This gets better and better.  They had to have access to Oswald's MC rifle (i.e. the one in the BY photo) to have planted it at the TSBD and place fired bullet casings from that rifle at the scene.   Right?  So if they had this rifle in their possession, why not use it to assassinate JFK instead of using an entirely different rifle?  Do you fully understand the complications of using a different rifle to assassinate JFK when trying to frame Oswald with another rifle not used in the crime?  Obviously not.  It is laughable.

[Richard Smith]

Indeed, neither "Richard" or that clown, Chapman, for that matter are able to have a normal discussion about the evidence. All they do is repeat the same old weak and implausible narrative and ignore and dismiss anything that does not fit in that narrative. It reminds me of Albert Einstein's famous line: "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

Oswald is linked to the rifle by the evidence (i.e. documents, prints, photos, witness testimony, serial number, PO box, use of an alias associated with him).  The rifle is linked to the assassination by overwhelming evidence (i.e. found at the crime scene, fired bullet casings, bullets and bullet fragments from that rifle).  Your rebuttal is simply that all this evidence could be faked or planted.  That is not a basis to raise any doubt.  It is an exercise in applying an impossible standard of proof to the facts and evidence to raise fake doubt.

[Walt Cakebread]

Oswald is linked to the rifle by the evidence (i.e. documents, prints, photos, witness testimony, serial number, PO box, use of an alias associated with him).  The rifle is linked to the assassination by overwhelming evidence (i.e. found at the crime scene, fired bullet casings, bullets and bullet fragments from that rifle).  Your rebuttal is simply that all this evidence could be faked or planted.  That is not a basis to raise any doubt.  It is an exercise in applying an impossible standard of proof to the facts and evidence to raise fake doubt.

You are very naive ...and gullible Mr "Smith"